ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi , Lockerbie bombing

Reply
Old 16th October 2010, 01:59 PM   #1
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
What happened to all the people who were certain Megrahi was guilty?

Maybe I should have started this thread earlier, as Bunntamas has gone away for now. However, I'll give it a shot.

Last year, any thread started regarding the Lockerbie bombing or Abdelbaset al-Megrahi attracted a fair number of posters who were keen to support the position that Megrahi carried out that atrocity. In a poll in September last year, 17 members stated that they were familiar with the evidence in the case and believed him to be guilty, though as the poll was anonymous, I don't know who they were. Many posters commented in Lockerbie threads that they disagreed with me in believing the conviction to be perverse.

Bunntamas, who joined the forum in August, lost her father on Pan Am 103, and believes Megrahi to be the perpetrator. She obviously has quite considerable familiarity with the evidence. I encouraged her to join, assuring her that she wouldn't be in a minority of one, because JREF posters are generally supportive of "official versions" and don't like conspiracy theories, and because I knew there were quite a few posters here who had expressed the same belief as her.

She posted in several threads both here and in conspiracy theories, and received no support at all. I think she may have felt she was being ganged up on. I now feel quite guilty for assuring her she would have support here, and wouldn't be arguing her corner alone.

So what happened? Has there inded been a general change of mind/heart about this case, although very few people actually came out and said so? Or what?

I'm posting in this forum area because most of the older posts I'm referring to were made here, and because I don't want to get into theories, evidence or whatever. I'd just like to know what happened to the "I'm quite sure he did it" school of thought.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 16th October 2010 at 02:04 PM. Reason: Add link
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2010, 02:03 PM   #2
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 10,881
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Maybe I should have started this thread earlier, as Bunntamas has gone away for now. However, I'll give it a shot.

Last year, any thread started regarding the Lockerbie bombing or Abdelbaset al-Megrahi attracted a fair number of posters who were keen to support the position that Megrahi carried out that atrocity. In a poll in September last year, 17 members stated that they were familiar with the evidence in the case and believed him to be guilty, though as the poll was anonymous, I don't know who they were. Many posters commented in Lockerbie threads that they disagreed with me in believing the conviction to be perverse.

Bunntamas, who joined the forum in August, lost her father on Pan Am 103, and believes Megrahi to be the perpetrator. She obviously has quite considerable familiarity with the evidence. I encouraged her to join, assuring her that she wouldn't be in a minority of one, because JREF posters are generally supportive of "official versions" and don't like conspiracy theories, and because I knew there were quite a few posters here who had expressed the same belief as her.

She posted in several threads both here and in conspiracy theories, and received no support at all. I think she may have felt she was being ganged up on. I now feel quite guilty for assuring her she would have support here, and wouldn't be arguing her corner alone.

So what happened? Has there inded been a general change of mind/heart about this case, although very few people actually came out and said so? Or what?

I'm posting in this forum area because most of the older posts I'm referring to were made here, and because I don't want to get into theories, evidence or whatever. I'd just like to know what happened to the "I'm quite sure he did it" school of thought.

Rolfe.
We gave up, due to your obsession with the guy.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th October 2010, 02:06 PM   #3
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Gave up believing he was guilty?

Or do you have some killer insight you could have brought out to help Bunntamas, but didn't?

Funny how the Amanda Knox discussion is at about 25,000 posts and counting. Doesn't seem too hard to find support for either side of that debate, obsessive or not.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 16th October 2010 at 02:08 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 07:54 AM   #4
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Gave up believing he was guilty?
Gave up in trying to convince you that your obsession is pointless.

Smashing brick walls to bits with your forehead is just as pleasurable, but much more productive.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 10:02 AM   #5
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Contrary to claims made, I would suggest it is because the case and arguments for Megrahi's guilt are not supported by the evidence, and people have actually accepted that. If not openly, then tacit acceptance is clear.

The evidence does not support, nor identify, Megrahi as the purchaser of the clothing.

The evidence, of which there is none, thus does not support the allegation that the bomb was inserted at Luqa in Malta.

And all the other evidence, which is subject to interpretation, scepticism and tenuous inference, could perhaps be an indication of involvement by a particular State or group, but cannot be attributed to any single individual, and certainly not Megrahi.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 11:33 AM   #6
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,496
Interpretation, scepticism, tenuous inference... it's an inconclusive dead-end.

The Apollo Project is one of the most thoroughly-documented, publically-available projects ever undertaken.

The collapse of the WTC towers on 9/11 provides a wealth of evidence and presents a solvable problem in structural engineering.

For these questions, there are answers. I haven't looked at any of the Amanda Knox threads lately, but last time I checked everybody involved seemed to think there were answers there as well.

Last time I looked at any of the Lockerbie threads, all I saw were questions. The State has answers, but you don't like those answers. I admit, the walls of text, the endless, laborious appeals to incredulity and supposition... After a while, I gave up trying to wade through it all.

Did you ever get to the point of having answers? Or is it still in the seemingly-endless unaswered questions phase?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 11:43 AM   #7
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 10,881
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
Contrary to claims made, I would suggest it is because the case and arguments for Megrahi's guilt are not supported by the evidence, and people have actually accepted that. If not openly, then tacit acceptance is clear.

...
Yep. Sure thing. You win.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 11:53 AM   #8
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Interpretation, scepticism, tenuous inference... it's an inconclusive dead-end.

The Apollo Project is one of the most thoroughly-documented, publically-available projects ever undertaken.

The collapse of the WTC towers on 9/11 provides a wealth of evidence and presents a solvable problem in structural engineering.

For these questions, there are answers. I haven't looked at any of the Amanda Knox threads lately, but last time I checked everybody involved seemed to think there were answers there as well.

Last time I looked at any of the Lockerbie threads, all I saw were questions. The State has answers, but you don't like those answers. I admit, the walls of text, the endless, laborious appeals to incredulity and supposition... After a while, I gave up trying to wade through it all.

Did you ever get to the point of having answers? Or is it still in the seemingly-endless unaswered questions phase?
The problem with that argument is that in the case of 9/11 there isn't much in the way of alturnative groups who could have done it in a way consistent with the evidence. Thus "okey who do you think did it?" is a reasonable question. In the case of the lockerbie bombing you are talking 1980s europe where there was not exactly a shortage of groups who could potentialy have done it.
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 11:53 AM   #9
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Quote:
What happened to all the people who were certain Megrahi was guilty?
We're waiting for the election of an administration that will have the balls to bomb Libya again.
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 03:59 PM   #10
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Gave up in trying to convince you that your obsession is pointless.

Smashing brick walls to bits with your forehead is just as pleasurable, but much more productive.

McHrozni
MC, you poser. You never smashed a thing with anything. And it sounds like you're over trying at that? Feel free to move on then and best wishes.

ETA: Should make it less personal. McHrozni, you've done some good work on Pearl Harbor, at the least. But on this issue, you raised nothing of major import. A few worthy considerations, and a lot of argument by incredulity. Neither you nor anyone at this forum has yet really said anything of weight against the body of facts pointing to a frame-up or at least some kind of epic wrongness.

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 17th October 2010 at 04:12 PM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 04:21 PM   #11
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Did you ever get to the point of having answers? Or is it still in the seemingly-endless unaswered questions phase?
A clear definition of "answer" might be helpful here. I think Rolfe, Buncrana, and myself agree on the best guesses to all the really relevant questions, but admittedly none of that's been enshrined as legal reality yet, if that's what you mean.

We're sure Megrahi was not the buyer of the clothes at Gauci's shop.

We're fairly certain, one way or another out of two options, that the evidence suggesting an unaccompanied bag leaving Megrahi's position and loaded to 103 is at the least highly inconclusive.

We're pretty certain the PFLP-GC really did the crime, via an unknown agent loading the fifth Khreesat bomb directly into container AVE4041 at Heathrow at about 16:1GMT
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/...hronology.html
(or perhaps later, depending...)
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/...-heathrow.html

We're not as in agreement as to what physical evidence might have been planted, and going into that takes us too far in the CT direction for the current discussion, which is about Megrahi's guilt, not alleged frame-ups.

What was it about these answers you found unconvincing? What mitigates against them?

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 17th October 2010 at 04:31 PM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 04:28 PM   #12
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by geni View Post
The problem with that argument is that in the case of 9/11 there isn't much in the way of alturnative groups who could have done it in a way consistent with the evidence. Thus "okey who do you think did it?" is a reasonable question. In the case of the lockerbie bombing you are talking 1980s europe where there was not exactly a shortage of groups who could potentialy have done it.
Indeed. And one of those groups, the PFLP-GC, was in touch with Iran as early as 4 July 1988 to help them avenge the 3 July shoot-down of Iran Air 655. Same group reportedly paid $11 million by Iran's Interior Minister. Same group built five altitude sensitive bombs disguised in radios. Four of these five were recovered. These were set to blow app. 30-60 minutes after takeoff following first introduction. PA103 blew up 38 minutes after leaving Heathrow.

And further, the evidence that eclipsed all this and pointed to Libya instead is rather cartoonish.

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
We're waiting for the election of an administration that will have the balls to bomb Libya again.
Typical American. Just continue to not use your God-given reason in the interim, or you might have to back down on that certainty. Stay tough, eh?
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 04:45 PM   #13
Architect
Chief Punkah Wallah
 
Architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 9,555
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Typical American. Just continue to not use your God-given reason in the interim, or you might have to back down on that certainty. Stay tough, eh?
I assume he was being sarcastic. Or maybe ironic. But either way, I don't think he meant it literally....
__________________
When the men elected to make laws are but a small part of a foreign parliament, that is when all healthy national feeling dies.

James Keir Hardie (1856 - 1915): Politician, Founder of Scottish Labour Party
Architect is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 04:58 PM   #14
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Typical American. Just continue to not use your God-given reason in the interim, or you might have to back down on that certainty. Stay tough, eh?
I'm a Canadian citizen.

If Libya is going to support terrorism, they can suffer the consequences... again.
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 05:40 PM   #15
Sword_Of_Truth
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 11,495
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
Contrary to claims made, I would suggest it is because the case and arguments for Megrahi's guilt are not supported by the evidence, and people have actually accepted that. If not openly, then tacit acceptance is clear.
I've largely given up talking to a couple of the usual gang of idiots over in the 9/11 CT section because they adhere to the most astronomically stupid theories about the attacks, they've exhausted their minimal entertainment value and they simply will not listen to anything that is being said to them.

By your absurd and asinine reasoning, I am now a no-planer/death rays from space kook.
Sword_Of_Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 08:50 PM   #16
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,496
Originally Posted by geni View Post
The problem with that argument is that in the case of 9/11 there isn't much in the way of alturnative groups who could have done it in a way consistent with the evidence. Thus "okey who do you think did it?" is a reasonable question. In the case of the lockerbie bombing you are talking 1980s europe where there was not exactly a shortage of groups who could potentialy have done it.
"Ability, therefore culpability"? No shortage of groups, and no way to narrow it down, apparently.

Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
A clear definition of "answer" might be helpful here. I think Rolfe, Buncrana, and myself agree on the best guesses to all the really relevant questions, but admittedly none of that's been enshrined as legal reality yet, if that's what you mean.
I mean that all of it amounts to "best guesses".


Have you ever heard of the board game, Clue? It's based on the principle of "best guesses", too. But at the end of the game, the truth is revealed, and we learn whether or not the guesses are correct. The three of you have given your best guess: Not Professor Plum, not in the Library, not with the Candlestick, but maybe somebody else, in some other room, with some other implement. But until the envelope is produced, and the cards revealed, it's still just a guess. And that's the current state of play: guesses.

Quote:
What was it about these answers you found unconvincing? What mitigates against them?
That they are founded upon supposition and appeals to incredulity. In short, questions, but no answers.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 09:03 PM   #17
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
I'm a Canadian citizen.
That's funny, because I'm an American.

Quote:
If Libya is going to support terrorism, they can suffer the consequences... again.
Little sarcasm there, it seems. Did you miss the part where it really seems they didn't support or order terrorism, at least in the case of PA103? I understand legal and widely accepted truth is often hard to separate from verifiable physical truth. But do remember with some humbleness there many men out there could feel the acute difference standing at the bar, hearing the punishment they're to pay for their heinous crime they know they didn't commit.

FWIW, Megrahi's punishment is less severe than many wrongfully convicted of just one murder here in the states. It's not so much for his sake that I'm all fired up about this issue.

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buncrana
Contrary to claims made, I would suggest it is because the case and arguments for Megrahi's guilt are not supported by the evidence, and people have actually accepted that. If not openly, then tacit acceptance is clear.
I've largely given up talking to a couple of the usual gang of idiots over in the 9/11 CT section because they adhere to the most astronomically stupid theories about the attacks, they've exhausted their minimal entertainment value and they simply will not listen to anything that is being said to them.

By your absurd and asinine reasoning, I am now a no-planer/death rays from space kook.
Sorry, not sure how the one follows from the other. I think it's fair to say no-planers and official story supporters share at least one trait in common - they've lost in battle of reason here at this forum thus far.

Otherwise, the differences are quite obvious to all of us here, and no one will argue that the official story of Megrahi's plot makes a bit more sense than real-time 3-D open-air mid-day holographics, convincing from all angles, synched with sound source and explosives to fake its devastation, with real planes and passengers eliminated elsewhere, and... etc...

How much more sense is open to debate. But the debate should be kept to the CT forum, where the informal consensus here has been reached and should be firmly challenged, someday, hopefully.
Especially this thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=169917
It would behoove anyone who's sure of the supposedly debunked positon to actually back that up with arguments and evidence, rather than flippantly dismiss those on the other side as obviously wrong, somehow. It's what we demand of moonbats and CTists, isn't it? So why shouldn't we live up to it ourselves?

So the disagreements aside, where are all the people who are so sure Megrahi is guilty? Why aren't they involved in discussions about that? Until now anyway?

So far we've got:

We gave up, due to your obsession with the guy.
(valid in its way, but obviously in no other way)

Gave up in trying to convince you that your obsession is pointless.
(gave up before starting)

Interpretation, scepticism, tenuous inference... it's an inconclusive dead-end. [...] Did you ever get to the point of having answers? Or is it still in the seemingly-endless unaswered questions phase?
(diqualified - unanswered questions implies theprestige isn't certain of Megrahi's guilt)

and my favorite:
We're waiting for the election of an administration that will have the balls to bomb Libya again.
(covered above)

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 17th October 2010 at 09:13 PM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2010, 09:30 PM   #18
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
"Ability, therefore culpability"? No shortage of groups, and no way to narrow it down, apparently.


I mean that all of it amounts to "best guesses".


Have you ever heard of the board game, Clue? It's based on the principle of "best guesses", too. But at the end of the game, the truth is revealed, and we learn whether or not the guesses are correct. The three of you have given your best guess: Not Professor Plum, not in the Library, not with the Candlestick, but maybe somebody else, in some other room, with some other implement. But until the envelope is produced, and the cards revealed, it's still just a guess. And that's the current state of play: guesses.


That they are founded upon supposition and appeals to incredulity. In short, questions, but no answers.
On its own, Geni's post showed that your comparisons with 9/11 are unfounded. But in your response to him and me, I can't help but notice that you completely glossed over the answers I provided on group, motive, technology, and how it fits in with the evidence. There's much more I didn't mention, like the primary-style suitcase (brown or maroony hards-shell Samsonite style) placed into AVE4041 at Heathrow, that COULD NOT have been from Malta, and that no one can testify just where it came from. Just appeared ... then disappeared after the bombing, with fragments of a brown hard-shell Samsonite being found and presumed as the primary suitcase, and not one other such case accounted for in everything recovered.

If you have the debunks on why this must all be coincidence, take it to this thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=165824

Here it's about Megrahi's guilt, and I'd like to see someone defend Tony Gauci's supposed identification of Megrahi, upon which the judgment rested. Can anyone show how their acceptance was reasonable? It's even simpler to grasp than the Amanda Knox stuff, believe it or not.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:30 AM   #19
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
Gave up in trying to convince you that your obsession is pointless.

Smashing brick walls to bits with your forehead is just as pleasurable, but much more productive.

McHrozni was the only poster to admit that he'd been wrong about the strength of the evidence against Megrahi, before bowing out of the discussion. So I gave him some credit for that.

However, this "obsession" is "pointless"? Pointless in what way? That no amount of evidence for Megrahi's innocence is going to convince you? Or what?

Of course, arguing with people with obsessions is so pointless, especially whan you're right. That's why the 9/11 subforum is a lonely wasteland of twoofers posting their fantasies, without any debunkers in sight.

That's why the Amanda Knox threads are entirely populated by people who believe she's innocent, and those who believe she's guilty have taken their solid, evidence-based arguments away because it's pointless.

Oh wait....

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 18th October 2010 at 01:35 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:34 AM   #20
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Last time I looked at any of the Lockerbie threads, all I saw were questions. The State has answers, but you don't like those answers. I admit, the walls of text, the endless, laborious appeals to incredulity and supposition... After a while, I gave up trying to wade through it all.

Did you ever get to the point of having answers? Or is it still in the seemingly-endless unaswered questions phase?

Questions about what?

The thread is about posters who believe Megrahi actually carried out the Pan Am 103 bombing. Not about who else might have done it.

Certainly, once you start enquiring into who actually carried out that atrocity, you get a helluva lot of questions. However, that's stage 2. Stage 1 is the realisation that whoever it was, it wasn't Megrahi. If you seriously can't follow the arguments to the point of figuring that part out, I don't think you've been paying much attention at all.

The question was about belief in Megrahi's guilt. Not about theories regarding who was really guilty.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:57 AM   #21
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
We're waiting for the election of an administration that will have the balls to bomb Libya again.

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
I'm a Canadian citizen.

If Libya is going to support terrorism, they can suffer the consequences... again.

I don't think there's any doubt whatsoever that Libya was a supporter of terrorism in the 1980s. It's absolutely certain that Libya supplied arms and munitions to the IRA, for one thing, arms and munitions that were used to blow up British children on the streets of England and Northern Ireland.

[Oh wait, where did the money come from to pay Libya for that? Lots of it, from the USA, including personal donations from senior US politicians, who continued supporting the IRA's murderous terror campaign despite all the pleas of the British government to stop it. So the USA was supporting terrorism in much the same way, at the same time. Just sayin'....]

Libya did other stuff as well - terrorism on its own account, not just supporting other terrorist activities. Pretty nasty bunch of thugs all round, I'd say.

Two reasons what these coments above are inappropriate though. First, this thread isn't about Libya being a terrorist regime in the 1980s. That's a given and so far as I know nobody is disputing it. It's about Libya, and indeed not just Libya but Abdelbaset al-Megrahi in particular, being responsible for one particular attack, that on Pan Am 103. I hope you'll agree that one needs actual evidence of actual involvement in a particular atrocity before being able to pronounce on guilt.

Second, Libya as a country today seems to be trying quite hard to put all that behind them. Does anyone have any evidence that the country has carried out any terror attacks in the past ten years, to take an arbitrary time frame? On the contrary, US companies are becoming heavily involved with Libya in respect of exploitation of its oil resources, to mutual profit and satisfaction. Libya is trying to become a normal part of international relations again.

So making remarks about "bombing Libya again", when any fool can see that bombing Libya only contributed to the escalation of the terror spiral in the late 20th century, is a pretty brain-dead attitude.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 02:08 AM   #22
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Quote:
Have you ever heard of the board game, Clue? It's based on the principle of "best guesses", too. But at the end of the game, the truth is revealed, and we learn whether or not the guesses are correct. The three of you have given your best guess: Not Professor Plum, not in the Library, not with the Candlestick, but maybe somebody else, in some other room, with some other implement. But until the envelope is produced, and the cards revealed, it's still just a guess. And that's the current state of play: guesses.
Well we could just wake you up when the ultimate truth is revealed by God or whoever. What does it look like when the "envelope is opened" in real life? Is that what they opened at Camp Zeist? Why did the CIA stuff the envelope? How well does this Clue metaphor hold up?

What's your own guess as to who did it, prestige? And what do you use to support it with?

(sorry to provide only questions once again, but you position baffles me. If you like I could offer my own answers.)

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 18th October 2010 at 02:09 AM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 02:35 AM   #23
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth View Post
I've largely given up talking to a couple of the usual gang of idiots over in the 9/11 CT section because they adhere to the most astronomically stupid theories about the attacks, they've exhausted their minimal entertainment value and they simply will not listen to anything that is being said to them.

By your absurd and asinine reasoning, I am now a no-planer/death rays from space kook.

I think we're trying to compare and contrast, here. You personally may not be debating the twoofers and their ridiculous theories, but there are plenty people only too eager to do so. These people have strong arguments, and a command of the issues, and a bunch of facts at their fingertips, and for whatever reason, they quite like smacking twoofers.

No sign of any of that in the Lockerbie threads. Especially, no sign of any strong arguments, command of the issues or indeed any actual facts, on the part of the occasional poster who makes a hit-and-run post saying he or she still thinks Megrahi did it (we haven't even had one of these for a while).

Which leads on to my second point here. Are you trying to say that those of us who believe Megrahi had nothing to do with Pan Am 103 will not listen to anything said to us? You know, you could try actually saying something, beyond, "I don't agree" and "the court returned a guilty verdict".

My original point was about the lack of support for Bunntamas, who was trying to make a case for Megrahi's guilt. I had promised her she would find support here, because there were many posters who had expressed that opinion, and while I had yet to elicit anything in the way of reasoning from them on the matter, I was sure when she came to present her arguments, she would have some back-up.

Bunntamas's arguments in fact turned out to be tenuous inference and innuendo. This disappointed me a great deal, because I had hoped very much to find out why those who believe in Megrahi's guilt believe in that way. In situations where there are two possibly valid interpretations of the evidence, then indeed one may end up by agreeing to disagree. However, I'm getting nothing. Nothing to support Megrahi's guilt but tenuous innuendo and wild conspiracy theories.

So I don't much rate replies which imply that you have all these great arguments but we're not listening.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 02:39 AM   #24
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by rwguinn View Post
Yep. Sure thing. You win.

Yeah, we've had this before.

No counterarguments, no coherent case at all to explain how Megrahi could possibly have carried out the bombing. The man had an alibi, dammit!

So that's OK, you just post "you win", in a tone calculated to imply that you simply can't be bothered presenting all these killer arguments you have, but have never favoured us with.

Some bunch of sceptics we have here, is all I can say.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:21 AM   #25
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
So I don't much rate replies which imply that you have all these great arguments but we're not listening.

Rolfe.
I'm all ears too. Even if it's not quite the right thread, let's meet halfway and see right here anything to support the evidence against Megrahi from Rgwinn or Sword of Truth or anyone.

The two key points revolve around Megrahi's movements on Malta. His conviction was based on his purchase of clothing on December 7 and his being at Luga airport as Air Malta flight 180 was loading.

On the first, why is the purchase date Dec 7? Who can support or even knows a speck about this basic fact of the case? Next, what makes Tony's identification of Megrahi so darn reliable? At trial he was less than convincing, but what did his earliest statements say? And lastly, where's the logic in such a purchase, buying clothing brand new at a low-traffic secialty shop, just miles from the Libyan cultural center and the airport where the bomb would be introduced?

On the other, what evidence do we have that Megrahi being at the airport, boarding a separate flight, has anything to do with a bomb being slipped into the system (by someone else obviously)? And what documentary evidence is there that such an item was introduced there? Not even a bomb or a certain case, just for an extra unaccompanied bag on KM180, what proof is there?

What other evidence is there connecting Megrahi to the actual bomb and bombing with that suitcase and its contents? What do the indictments say? It's all pretty weak, isn't it? Most of you have never looked before, have you?
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:32 AM   #26
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
"Ability, therefore culpability"? No shortage of groups, and no way to narrow it down, apparently.

I mean that all of it amounts to "best guesses".

Have you ever heard of the board game, Clue? It's based on the principle of "best guesses", too. But at the end of the game, the truth is revealed, and we learn whether or not the guesses are correct. The three of you have given your best guess: Not Professor Plum, not in the Library, not with the Candlestick, but maybe somebody else, in some other room, with some other implement. But until the envelope is produced, and the cards revealed, it's still just a guess. And that's the current state of play: guesses.

That they are founded upon supposition and appeals to incredulity. In short, questions, but no answers.

Prestige, Caustic Logic, the lot of you. I think I specifically said in my OP that I didn't want to get into theories, and if I wasn't clear enough I'll say it again. I'm interested in posters' opinions on whether Megrahi carried out the Pan Am 103 bombing. Not on who else might have done it, and actually, not even on whether Libya was or wasn't involved in some way.

The question of whether Megrahi did it isn't tenuous at all. It gets down to two very specific points. Did he buy the clothes from Tony Gauci? (No, frankly, on any sane reading of the evidence), and is there any evidence worth the name that an item of unaccompanied luggage was carried on KM180 out of Malta on the morning of 21st December 1988? (Again, no.)

This is not hard. The evidence is freely available for all to make up their own minds. This is what the thread is about, not speculative theories about who actually did it.

I have likened this to the Barry George/Jill Dando murder case. George was convicted of Dando's murder, on very tenuous supposition, and the conviction was upheld on appeal. A more detailed examination of the evidence at a second appeal eight years later blew the case out of the water. Barry George didn't do it. We still have no clue who did. You're like someone trying to support the theory that Barry George was in fact guilty of the Dando murder, by pointing out that all discussion of who else might have done it is speculative and comes to no firm conclusions. This is illogical.

The Prestige says,

Quote:
The State has answers, but you don't like those answers.

The State? Who's that? I'm talking about the criminal justice system of my own country, which by the documents it has itself issued in respect of the case, has convicted an innocent man of the mass murder of 270 people.

Virtually everyone who has read the judgement of the trial court and the judgement of the appeal court has noted that the evidence does not support the verdict issued. This was noted right from the moment the original verdict was issued in 2001, with many serious commentators publishing on the subject.

The other main "State" publication on the matter is the 2007 report of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which reported that the conviction may have been a miscarriage of justice on six separate counts. The four published counts were all related to the question of the clothes purchase, and made it crystal clear (if it wasn't already!) that Megrahi didn't buy these clothes.

So that's the position of the "State" at the point Megrahi dropped his ongoing appeal in order to be allowed to return to Libya as he was terminally ill. That it appears he didn't buy the clothes after all, and this should be tested in court.

If he didn't buy the clothes, the case collapses. End of story. That's actually the most recent official position of the "State". What is is about that you disagree with?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:35 AM   #27
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
So, as so aptly demonstrated, tacit acceptance is precisely the only conclusion to be arrived at given the dearth of responses to the OP who quite reasonably asked "what happened to the people who believed Megrahi was guilty?"

Yet, given the lack of response to this straightforward question, it seems their are quite a few who'd rather take issue with the suggestion that there is therefore no argument to be made for this position, than actually produce an argument as to why they still believe Megrahi is guilty. If there is no tacit acceptance, then what argument supports this continued belief of his guilt? And making any kind of response inferring that his innocence is yet to proven is not what the op is asking is it?
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:41 AM   #28
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
Contrary to claims made, I would suggest it is because the case and arguments for Megrahi's guilt are not supported by the evidence, and people have actually accepted that. If not openly, then tacit acceptance is clear.

Actually, I have to agree with Buncrana. I wouldn't insist that every single JREF member who holds the position that Megrahi is guilty should come and argue their case. I would, however, expect that some of them would do so.

None of them have.

All I'm seeing is handwaving about how nobody can be bothered to produce this killer evidence they have, because they can't be bothered and we're not listening.

That, to my mind, is symptomatic of a group of posters who haven't a clue, but due to current US political biasses, don't want to acknowledge that the US is currently working itself into a lather of a hate-fest against an innocent man.

On the other hand, I note that quite a few JREF members have indeed followed the arguments and concluded that Megrahi suffered a miscarriage of justice. I see a fair number of JREF members' names signed up to the current petition to have the Scottish government open an independent inquiry into the affair. Which is standing well over 1,000 signatures now.

So it's not all bad, JREF. There are some genuinely open-minded sceptics in the room.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 07:53 AM   #29
Tricky
Briefly immortal
 
Tricky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: The Group W Bench
Posts: 44,252
Mod Warning While it is perfectly fine to ask other members about their opinions, do not let this thread become about other members. There's a lot of stuff in here that could be considered "personalizing the issue", and while we're letting it stand (for now) please remember the MA and avoid letting this drift into incivility and personal attacks.
Posted By:Tricky
Tricky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:00 PM   #30
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
I admit I started sliding that way with McHrozni. But saying someone has an obsession and the ideas they're obsessed with are therefore not worthy of consideration, is a personal critique parlayed into an argument or non-argument. "I won't talk to you because you really want me to," "I'm not going to talk to you because your breath smell bad," etc. It's a pretty lame move from an argumentative perspective and often shows the person has nothing to offer except cover stories.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:36 PM   #31
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I see we have four posters in total in the thread who still seem to be on the "Megrahi did it" side. That's quite a reduction on the 17 who declared a year ago that they were familiar with the evidence, and believed Megrahi to be the perpetrator.

I also note that none of them have provided any support for their position in this thread. I appreciate I said, in the OP, that I didn't want to get into theories and the minutiae of evidence and so on. However, as I, and Caustic Logic, and Buncrana, can say that we don't believe Megrahi is the bomber because we don't believe he bought the clothes from Tony Gauci, and because we don't believe there's credible evidence to support the notion that an unaccompanied bag was smuggled on to KM180 at Malta, I was hoping those on the other side of the debate might be able to encapsulate their views in a similar way.

Looking at the content of the replies, all I can say, really, is "call yourself sceptics?"

On the other side of the story, while I don't know everybody's real names obviously, as far as I can tell a dozen or so JREF members have actually signed the Justice for Megrahi petition calling for an independent inquiry to be set up into this case, which has been officially acknowledged by the Scottish legal system as a possible miscarriage of justice.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 01:46 PM   #32
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,169
I remember not even a year ago, that his guilt was so sure, that JREF mods would move ideas otherwise into the conspiracy section. This could be a good lesson to the heavy handed modding lately
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 02:05 PM   #33
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Well, to be fair, once you start talking about why he was found guilty even though the evidence says he isn't, you're right in there with conspiracy theories. Never mind discussing the details of the frame-up, or alternative possibilities about which group actually did it.

I do recall, however, asking a mod whether I could start a thread similar to the Amanda Knox thread, simply to discuss the evidence in the Megrahi trial and whether it actually supported his guilt, and have it NOT be moved to the CT forum. I was told that it was very likely to be so moved, so I didn't bother.

I was going to suggest a way forward with this thread. If the "guilters" (sorry!) are so fed up explaining their reasoning that they don't want to do it again, maybe one or more of them could link to a post or series of posts which they feel gives a good explanation of the case for Megrahi being the Lockerbie bomber. I'd really appreciate avoiding unsupported innuendo and circular reasoning though.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:31 PM   #34
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Maybe I should have started this thread earlier, as Bunntamas has gone away for now. However, I'll give it a shot.

She posted in several threads both here and in conspiracy theories, and received no support at all. I think she may have felt she was being ganged up on. I now feel quite guilty for assuring her she would have support here, and wouldn't be arguing her corner alone.
Thanks Rolfe. I appreciate the thoughts. Don't feel guilty. You have been quite gracious in your comments. And you're not responsible for others whom have not been so gracious. However, I do wish you would stop using me as the "poster child" for opposition on this topic. Kinda makes me wonder if you're bored and have nothing else to say / do. I know you're smarter than that.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
So what happened? Has there inded been a general change of mind/heart about this case, although very few people actually came out and said so? Or what?
HAHA! Good try on the "general change of mind/heart about this case". Nope.
For me, going 'round and 'round, and yes, being "ganged up on" is the reason I bailed on this discussion, and will continue to only lurk and comment minimally going forward. As exhibited by the the Tricky Mod above, so early in the life of this thread it's no wonder no one wants to play with you all in this sand box.
And by the way, per other comments on another thread, forum and blog comments and regurgitating the media for years on end does not evidence make.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 18th October 2010 at 04:20 PM.
Bunntamas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:37 PM   #35
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Tricky View Post
Mod Warning While it is perfectly fine to ask other members about their opinions, do not let this thread become about other members. There's a lot of stuff in here that could be considered "personalizing the issue", and while we're letting it stand (for now) please remember the MA and avoid letting this drift into incivility and personal attacks.
Posted By:Tricky
Thank you Tricky!!!! - (Bunny smirks at CL)

Last edited by Bunntamas; 18th October 2010 at 03:54 PM.
Bunntamas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:40 PM   #36
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by mchrozni View Post
gave up in trying to convince you that your obsession is pointless.

Smashing brick walls to bits with your forehead is just as pleasurable, but much more productive.

Mchrozni
amen!!!!!

Last edited by Bunntamas; 18th October 2010 at 03:42 PM.
Bunntamas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:43 PM   #37
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Sorry, I wasn't meaning to use you as a "poster child" as you put it. I mainly felt guilty about my assurances that there were posters on this forum who would support your arguments, and I was trying to find some way to smoke them out.

I realise of course that you haven't changed your mind, however there is some evidence that the spread of opinion on the forum in general has undergone somewhat of a shift in the past year or so.

I would say that the court transcripts, the court and appeal judgements, the witness statements and the SCCRC report and supporting material, do indeed evidence make. Among other things. References to serious discussion and exposition of this evidence don't seem entirely illegitimate to me either.

It's not often you find a court judgement where commentator after commentator points out that the verdict is simply not supported by the text of the judgement itself, and I make no apology for pointing that out.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 18th October 2010 at 03:44 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 03:52 PM   #38
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
And by the way, per other comments on another thread, forum and blog comments and regurgitating the media for years on end does not evidence make.
No, people talking on blogs, in forums, in book, or in court do not constitute evidence. Good call. They do, sometimes, discuss evidence.

So if people talking about the evidence isn't evidence, what is it when people talk about the case and affirm their opinions with circular reasoning without considering the core evidence in any reasonable detail? Is that evidence, or what?
---

People here will argue back and forth at great length about chalky rocks chucked through windows and glass in leaves and dust-tainted bra clasps and just where how many fingerprints were left in Fiolmena's room, or whatever, but not a thing need be known about the pivotal day Megrahi's supposed to have purchased the clothing that was stuffed into a suitcase that killed 270 people in the worst pre-9/11 terrorist attack on U.S. civilians.

shut the CTists up with facts and evidence if you can. I promise to consider all attempted debunks with reason and not dismiss them summarily. I just haven't heard one yet. Not one.

It's okay to admit you've never allowed yourself to look closely before, but the Google-fu is there to use. Come on... here are the prompts: Mary's House, Tony Gauci, Paul Gauci, "six feet or more" "under six feet," "not exactly the man," Christmas lights, rainfall, football game, Rome-Dresden, Wednesday, 7:45-50 PM...

No, too obsessed? Okay, if me and Rolfe and everyone agrees to shut up and drop it entirely for, what, a week? Will anyone then schedule a detailed look followed by an informative comment? I'm game if so.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 04:11 PM   #39
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Yaaaaawwwwnnnn....

Last edited by Bunntamas; 18th October 2010 at 04:13 PM.
Bunntamas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2010, 04:17 PM   #40
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Yeah, it's after midnight. Goodnight!

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:52 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.